Logos Giveaway - sorry CA, NY, FL and RI - you are not eligible

Taken from the terms of the current Christmas giveaway: (emphasis is mine)

Logos Christmas Sweepstakes (the “Sweepstakes”) is open to legal residents of the contiguous United States, Alaska, Hawaii and the District of Columbia, over the age of 18, excluding residents from New York, Florida, California, and Rhode Island,

Am I reading this right?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Paul-C

Make that excluding residents from New York, Florida, California, and Rhode Island... and the rest of the world!

Paul-C (UK) [:)]

Richard Wardman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/675958#Comment_675958

Make that excluding residents from New York, Florida, California, and Rhode Island... and the rest of the world!

Paul-C (UK)

[Y]

Jesús Polaino

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/675959#Comment_675959

[Y]

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/675974#Comment_675974

Make that excluding residents from New York, Florida, California, and Rhode Island... and the rest of the world!

Paul-C (UK)

But do you need to say this if is says that it is open to "legal residents of the contiguous United States"? Since I live in Canada I think that excludes me. [:(]

Actual the word "contiguous" is an interesting adjective. Here is one set of definitions:

1. touching; in contact.

2. in close proximity without actually touching; near.

3. adjacent in time: contiguous events.

Alan Macgregor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/675988#Comment_675988

"legal residents of the contiguous United States"

I think this is lawyer-speak!

Every blessing

Alan

PS See what happens when you encourage chance!? [;)]

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/675988#Comment_675988

But do you need to say this if is says that it is open to "legal residents of the contiguous United States"? Since I live in Canada I think that excludes me.

Actual the word "contiguous" is an interesting adjective. Here is one set of definitions:

1. touching; in contact. 2. in close proximity without actually touching; near. 3. adjacent in time: contiguous events.

Bruce, I'm only teasing!

Russel Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/675988#Comment_675988

Bruce, it would be the first definition. We use it to refer to the 48 states (and DC), excluding Alaska and Hawaii - and I suppose Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, etc.

Kevin A Lewis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676014#Comment_676014

As a nation who used to own the "contiguous United States" and had "contiguous" tea merchants berthed in a New England harbour of renown - do we still qualify?

Proprietorially - Kevin

Russel Taylor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676020#Comment_676020

As a nation who used to own the "contiguous United States" and had "contiguous" tea merchants berthed in a New England harbour of renown - do we still qualify?

Proprietorially - Kevin

Alas, your nation does not meet the third definition of contiguous, as it has not held our United States as property contiguously to the present time. So no, you no longer qualify! So sorry... [:P]

Brother Mark

Living here under my rock, I hadn't heard of the sweepstakes. My gratitude to you for bringing it to my rather short span of attention.

Leigh Johnson

As a resident of RI I would really like to know why we are excluded?

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676047#Comment_676047

I see where it says "enter to win" but I dont see a link to do so

Randy W. Sims

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676050#Comment_676050

Maybe regulations???

http://www.thompsoncoburn.com/news-and-information/sweepstakes-law-blog/blog/12-01-05/do-you-need-to-register-your-sweepstakes.aspx

http://www.consumeradvertisinglawblog.com/.services/blog/6a00e5506f7328883400e5505bb0e58833/search?filter.q=International+Sweepstakes+and+Contests+

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676050#Comment_676050

I see where it says "enter to win" but I dont see a link to do so

For those interested, I found the link:

https://www.logos.com/christmas-sweepstakes-rules

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676047#Comment_676047

As a resident of RI I would really like to know why we are excluded?

I am sure it has something to do with RI's laws governing contests/games of chance. Logos would gladly include everyone if they could. (IMHO)

Jeremy White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676055#Comment_676055

I have no doubt that would include more people.

As a resident of CA I'm sad I don't even get to play. I do think it is a little odd considering the service they use (PunchTab) is based in Palo Alto, CA.

mab

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676236#Comment_676236

I suspect that the terms of the giveaway violate some contract obligations with some publishers or that the states themselves won't allow such a giveaway. Not surprised that California and New York are excluded. I also wouldn't be surprised that the number of states excluded will grow in the future.

James Hiddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676280#Comment_676280

Sorry for those who can't enter the sweepstakes.

*cough more chances for us cough"

Just kidding [;)] seriously it sucks that not everyone can enter!

Kaleb Cuevas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676047#Comment_676047

The restrictions of California, New York, and Rhode Island are due to state laws regarding contests and giveaways.

GaoLu

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676320#Comment_676320

So what counts...

Address of delivery?

Address of actual residence? Which one?

Address of most recent passport issue?

Address of legal residence?

I have a hodge podge of the above and surely one of them would qualify.

One of those addresses is fairly contiguous with Bellingham, so let's hope!

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676014#Comment_676014

Bruce, I'm only teasing!

I know. I was just being silly too.

Frank Sauer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676623#Comment_676623

With this restrictions in place, no matter the reason, it would be nice for Logos to not advertise it to those not eligible. Considering they have our addresses on file with our accounts, it shouldn't be that hard to script out those not qualified.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676652#Comment_676652

As long as I have to read for such restrictions on coupons, cereal boxes and magazine contests, I'll be willing to read for such restrictions on Logos Faithlife ... I have other personal favorites for Logos Faithlife to work on.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676674#Comment_676674

And to think that I have duly completed all the steps of every sweepstake...

It would be nice if international customers had also access to the good stuff. These territorial laws are a real pain at so many levels.

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676623#Comment_676623

Bruce, I'm only teasing!

I know. I was just being silly too.

A kindred spirit [:D]

diederick pütter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/676675#Comment_676675

I have been entering these for years, only to realise that international customers do not qualify - I have wasted good time and effort (free advertising for logos)

Due to no winner announcement, it made it even more difficult to believe in this competition; however according to logos it is due to US disclosure laws.

I have subsequently engaged the logo's chat support functionality and received the following response from Brandyn:

"If you are able to sign up for the giveaway you are eligible to receive it. Any geographical restrictions are recognized based on the settings applied to your account"

He has basically confirmed that if you can access the "This Month's Giveaway", you are eligible to be considered.

Not sure if I will make any further effort with this.

Myke Harbuck

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057950#Comment_1057950

I have been wondering if anyone has actually win as there is no announcement; according to logos it is due to US disclosure laws (convenient, as I do believe nobody wins anything).

This is a pretty strong accusation to make with no supporting evidence. Logos/Faithlife has built a long-lasting reputation of integrity and honesty, and as such they have no reason to jeopardize that with an insignificant giveaway.

Let's give them the benefit of the doubt. After all, remember, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057952#Comment_1057952

5 years seems reasonable,

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057950#Comment_1057950

Due to no winner announcement, it made it even more difficult to believe in this competition; however according to logos it is due to US disclosure laws.

Given the legal ramifications from failure to distribute promised prizes, it is even more difficult to believe that the competition is not legitimate.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1057950#Comment_1057950

Diederick Putter, I am able to personally verify that some years ago FL did indeed provide a prize, in a contest advertised online, to a non-US recipient, as I saw the (physical) prize and the packaging it was shipped in myself.